Tuesday, January 05, 2010

NHS dangerously dependant on Indian doctors

Fears of a brain drain in the NHS have been raised after the Indian government appealed to 15,000 doctors based here to work in new medical centres. Dr Ramesh Mehta, president of the British Association of Physicians of Indian Origin warned that thousands of doctors in Britain will leave in the next few years to work in India. He said around 15,000 British doctors who originated in India will leave to work in new medical centres in India over the next two to four years. A further 10,000 senior doctors of Indian origin are set to retire from the NHS, he said.

The health service has traditionally relied on ties with the subcontinent for a steady stream of doctors with thousands registering every year.

Dr Mehta, who is attending a conference in India, said: "There are around 15,000 young Indian-origin doctors undergoing training in different parts of Britain who will return to India. "Also, at least 10,000 senior doctors of Indian origin who are retiring from their jobs in the UK are set to return to India."

However the figures were questioned by other experts who said it would mean all the doctors of Indian origin in training posts in Britain leaving which they said was highly unlikely.

Dr Mehta said many of them were expected to take up positions in seven new elite medical centres for which the Indian health ministry is looking for quality doctors. The centres will be dotted around the country and modelled on the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), considered India's best state-run research and treatment centre. "We believe that these young doctors who are undergoing training in the UK currently can be of great help in the new AIIMS-like institutes," Dr Mehta said.

New rules now make it more difficult for medical graduates from outside Europe to come and train as doctors in Britain. Training posts have to be offered to an applicant from within the European Economic Area first and if there are none suitable the place can be offered to those outside Europe.


Another NHS failure to do diagnostic testing kills three toddlers

As they cuddled on the sofa, it seemed they had years of growing up to look forward to. But, tragically, the two children in this picture, Rhianna Warner and Kyron Vince, were both to die of meningitis only weeks later - and within 24 hours of each other. Three children have now been killed by the brain condition in less than three weeks in Ipswich.

The other was 11-month-old Ellie Parsons. Health chiefs say they have yet to find a direct link. Investigations have been launched by Ipswich Hospital after it emerged that Rhianna and Ellie were brought in after falling ill but sent home again. Rhianna, aged two, died within hours of being readmitted a day after being discharged on December 30. Her father, Ben Warner, 24, said: 'They thought she just had a high temperature. 'We were told to go home and give her antibiotics because they didn't want to do a blood test.'

Kyron, two, who was blind and had a pre-existing medical condition, became ill on December 31. He died after being transferred to Addenbrooke's Hospital in Cambridge, where an investigation has also been launched.

His grandfather, Adrian Collins, said Kyron's parents Vicky Holland and Mark Vince were 'numb beyond belief'. He added: 'Kyron was a lovely kid. He smiled a lot, laughed and brought a lot of joy to everybody.'

Meanwhile Ellie's parents, Kirsty Ludlow and Darren Parsons, are threatening legal action over the failure of doctors to diagnose their daughter's condition. They suspected she might have meningitis but she was diagnosed with an infection and discharged. She soon returned to hospital and although medics fought for an hour to save her when she stopped breathing, she died on December 14.

Miss Ludlow, 29, said: 'It has been terrible. We should have had her first birthday and then Christmas a few days later but it was all so empty.' Family and friends of the victims have been given antibiotics to limit the risk of any outbreak spreading. It is unusual, but not unheard of, for meningitis to be passed from one person to another.

A spokesman for Ipswich Hospital promised that its investigation would leave 'no stone unturned'.


UFO's More Likely than Health Bill Reducing Deficit

Which is the greater likelihood? That Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO's) are visiting Earth, or that Barack Obama's proposed $2.5 trillion health bill will actually reduce the deficit as promised?

Believe it or not, more Americans believe in UFO's than think legislation taking over the nation's health care system will do anything but add to the nation's insurmountable $12 trillion debt.

According to Rasmussen Reports, "The survey finds that 68% believe the legislation will increase the federal budget deficit. Only 11% say the program will achieve its stated goal of deficit reduction."

Compare that with 34 percent who believe in UFO’s, according to Opinion Dynamics.

Put another way, little green men traveling from across the galaxy are more believable than Barack Obama, who in his now infamous speech to a joint session of Congress said, “The plan will not add to our deficit.”

Astrology (29 percent), ghosts (34 percent), and witches (24 percent) all poll better than specious claims that providing health coverage to 30-45 million additional people will not cost anything.

Which is really not that surprising. The Senate version of the bill — which allegedly removes the “public option” from the plan — will spend some $350 billion more than it takes in through revenues in its first ten years alone, as ALG News has previously reported.

None of which bodes well for Congressional Democrats, especially for some 18 Blue Dogs in the House who promised in a letter not to vote for a bill that was not deficit-neutral, and then did anyway.

They were: Baron Hill (IN-CD9), Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-CD8), Patrick Murphy (PA-CD8), Mike Michaud (ME-CD2), Leonard Boswell (IA-CD3), John Salazar (CO-CD3), Travis Childers (MS-CD1), Christopher Carney (PA-CD10, Jim Cooper (TN-CD5), Sanford Bishop (GA-CD2), Marion Berry (AR-CD1), David Scott (GA-CD13), Kathy Dahlkemper (PA-CD3), Michael Arcuri (NY-CD24), Jim Costa (CA-CD20), Joe Baca (CA-CD43), Dennis Moore (KS-CD3), and Zack Space (OH-CD18).

They may, however, be able to boost their popularity by ordering an investigation of the Roswell “weather balloon” crash of 1947, or attending a few Star Trek conventions. Beam them up, Scotty.


Charity Begins At Home

Part of our current problem in addressing the healthcare legislation is that Americans are a generous people. We like to help each other. We all recognize that sometimes unexpected circumstances can hit the best of us with a mountain of debt and no obvious way out. We want to live by the golden rule – “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” – because, by and large, we believe that if we help someone else today, someone else will be better able to help us tomorrow. That is an admirable thing. Many times it is the truth as well.(That whole pay it forward deal plays very well into the American ethos.) The problem comes when we try to apply that ethos through the government rather than as individuals and private organizations. Individuals and some private organizations have a Christian mandate to help people and provide charity. Governments have a mandate to govern.

When the government gives charity, it creates no reciprocal obligation in the heart of those who receive that charity. It fosters an attitude that, not only is one a total failure at life who must be grudgingly rescued by his or her betters, but that one is entitled, by the inability to succeed at life, to that charity and need not pay it forward by word or deed. However, if your neighbor or church steps up and pays your mortgage for a hard month, or buys groceries or Christmas presents for a family that can’t afford them, that creates a thankful heart(usually) and a reciprocal obligation to give back to that neighbor or community group in some way.

Perhaps the fact that there is no way to give back to the government is the culprit. Instead of a feeling of thankfulness, the recipient is left with a sense of frustration and failure. With a neighbor or a neighborhood church, there are opportunities to help and return the favor. Taking on supervision of the Sunday school classes, shoveling the helpful neighbor’s walk in the winter or even sharing some fresh baking or inviting them to dinner. This creates a feeling of fulfillment and self sufficiency. It gives the recipient of that charity the opportunity to demonstrate to that church or neighbor that they are someone who was worthy of such charity. That they understand the obligations of a community to care for each other.

This is one of the reasons that government entitlements and charity are a failure and degrading to the overall character of the nation. How does government charity provide a picture of community support, self respect, cheerful giving and true charity when our children see their parents grumbling over the taxes that are taken from us to provide such charity? What message does it send when they see the recipients of government charity grumbling at how it should be better or how it didn’t really meet their needs? What message does it send to the children who are supported by such largesse? How does that encourage our children to continue our tradition of generosity? When our children see that those who are providing this charity (the taxpayers) are made the poorer by it and involuntarily at that.

Voluntary charity is a blessing for both the provider and the recipient. Involuntary charity is not charity, it is wealth redistribution. We the People need to recognize that, while government may be a fine vessel for the governing of a people, it is not a fit vessel for works of charity.


No comments: